Daily Archives: October 3, 2008

As expected, bailout package passes, Welch votes “yea”

The final vote for H.R. 1424 (aka “The Bailout Package”) was 263-171. The bill was passed.

Peter Welch voted for it. Then again, so did many other progressive/liberal Dems like Barbara Lee, Jesse Jackson Jr., Sheila Jackson-Lee, Jan Schakowsky, Ed Markey, Henry Waxman, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Mike Capuano, Jim McGovern, and even Keith Ellison. So Welch was with good company folks. He must know something we don’t know.

Other than that… go RED SOX!!!

Full Transparency required of Symington, but not Dubie?

On Vermont Edition moments ago, a caller asked Jim Douglas about his negative ad questioning Symington's integrity for not providing her husband's tax information.

Douglas piled on, saying, “I don't know what she's hiding,” suggesting that she needed to provide the full picture.

Amazingly, there was no follow up on Douglas' running mate, Brian Dubie, who is not providing his tax information either.  Douglas also gave a pass to Cindy McCain.

As John Odum would say, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Costello has his numbers on the table, yet Dubie is getting a free pass.  What's up with that?

 

Maybe some phone calls should be made requesting Dubie's tax return.

Quick note on VP debate

As bad as Palin's been all week, we knew that she couldn't live down to that level of ineptitude tonight. Literally anything she said tonight wouldn't be as bad as everything she said to Katie Couric. As it turned out, that's pretty much what happened: as expected, she exceeded expectations.

But what does that mean? She didn't make any stupid statements. Her statements and arguments were almost devoid of content. As before, she adhered very closely to her preloaded talking points, including repetetive claims that she and McBush are “mavericks”. Lucky thing we weren't playing the Palin drinking game tonight. Nevertheless, content or no, she was perky, spunky, and stuck with her scripted persona. It was like watching Biden try to debate Kelly Ripa. (Oh, and by the way, happy birthday, Kelly!)

Biden, on the other hand, was great. There were a few points where his remarks probably got deeper into the details of what happens in the Senate than was good for him. On the other hand, he displayed a breadth of knowledge, judgment, and a commitment to the real people of the United States that was very impressive. One of the television commentators said it was the best debate of his life, and I'm prepared to accept it. While in past years he's come across as a lightweight, too fond of the cute smile and quip, tonight, he was a statesman.

The TV commentators were observing that Palin's performance were designed to, and did, shore up support among the Republican base. Maybe so, but that's fine with me. At this stage in the campaign, if the ticket that's behind has to devote this effort to shoring up the base, that means they're not passing, or even catching up, they're just trying to avoid losing any more ground. Maybe they did that, but that's probably not good enough for them.

The Most Important Decision of our Time

So, let’s get down to it.

The House of Representatives will vote, probably tomorrow, on the most important money bill ever in the history of our country.

Our Representative, Peter Welch, last I heard was undecided.

This, perhaps the premier source for intelligent thinking that Peter may pay attention to, is not providing any thought to him.

This should stop.  Let’s hear people’s opinion on this matter.

I’ll start with mine.  DON’T DO IT!  

Giving Wall Street this money is like giving more heroin to a heroin addict.  There needs to be another way.  Those that benefited by creating this mess need to be the ones to pay for solving it.  If indeed there is payback and no net cost, then the money raised would help to pay off the massive deficit.

I said  it and I’m glad!

PJ

“Concerned Citizens for Wal-Mart” dabbles with irony.

This a flier that’s been distributed around St. Albans recently:

So here’s what interests me:

  1. It looks as though they’re enticing people to show up by offering them free crap.  I’m sure that will give us a good perspective on whether or not they’re there to support Wal-mart.
  2. It looks like quite a bit of money went into arranging this event.  I wonder where it all came from.
  3. The last two sentences win the “unintentional irony of the week” award.  A promotion to support local merchants in support of an organization which is pretty much guaranteed to run them out of business?  This is like having a “pro-life.  pro-family” statement at the end of an announcement for a “lesbians for choice” rally.

I don’t know who dreams this stuff up, but if you could place that sort of surrealism in pill form, you’d probably make millions.